Larry Minnick and Charla Minnick v. Commissioner - Page 6




                                        - 5 -                                         
          related income as “other income” on the front of petitioners’               
          Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, rather than as               
          business income on the Schedules C, Profit or Loss From Business.           
          Respondent accordingly disallowed the related Schedule C expenses           
          which were in excess of the Amway income, and recharacterized the           
          remaining related expenses as miscellaneous itemized deductions             
          subject to the 2-percent floor under section 67(a).3  Petitioners           
          argue that the Amway activity was engaged in for profit and that            
          the related expenses should therefore be allowed in full as                 
          deductions.                                                                 
               In order for expenses incurred in connection with an                   
          activity to be deductible, the expenses generally must have been            
          ordinary and necessary either in carrying on a trade or business            
          or in an activity engaged in to produce income.  Secs. 162(a),              
          212; Elliott v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 960, 969 (1988), affd. 899            
          F.2d 18 (9th Cir. 1990).  In order for the expenses to be                   
          deductible in either situation, taxpayers must have conducted the           
          activity with the intent to make a profit.  Elliott v.                      
          Commissioner, supra at 970.  Alternatively, taxpayers may claim a           
          deduction under section 183(b)(2) to the extent of the income               
          derived from the activity, if they otherwise meet the                       


               3Respondent also determined that, if petitioners were found            
          to have had a profit objective, a portion of the claimed Amway-             
          related expenses was nevertheless not deductible under sec. 162.            
          Based on our holding, we need not address this alternative                  
          position.                                                                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011